Últimas Noticias

Rubio Applauds Senate’s Passage of Bill to Improve Justice for American Victims of International Terrorism

Aug 23, 2018 | Comunicados de Prensa

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) applauded the Senate’s unanimous passage of the Anti-Terrorism Clarification Act of 2018 (S. 2946), bipartisan legislation to improve access to justice in U.S. courts for Americans who are victimized by acts of terrorism while abroad.  The legislation, which Rubio joined Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) in introducing in May, clarifies congressional intent behind provisions of the Antiterrorism Act of 1992, which some federal courts have misinterpreted, and makes needed improvements to the original law.
“The Anti-Terrorism Clarification Act will help Floridians and other Americans who are victims of international terrorism in their efforts to seek justice in federal courts,” Senator Rubio said.  “I thank Senator Grassley for his leadership and my colleagues for their support, and I hope the House of Representatives will quickly send this bipartisan bill to the White House for the president’s signature.”
“Over twenty-five years ago, I led the Senate’s effort to pass the Antiterrorism Act to improve justice for Americans victimized by acts of terrorism abroad. Congress’ intent was clear: U.S. victims of international terrorism should be able to seek justice in U.S. courts against those responsible, no matter where the attacks occurred. But recent flawed court decisions have undermined the law’s purpose,” Senator Grassley said.  “Our bill is a carefully balanced approach to better ensure victims’ access to compensation and to hold supporters of terrorism accountable. I thank my colleagues for their bipartisan work to advance this important bill, and I look forward to President Trump signing it into law.”
El Anti-Terrorism Clarification Act cleared the Senate Judiciary Committee in July.  Co-sponsors include Senators Bill Nelson (D-FL), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Ted Cruz (R-TX), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Thom Tillis (R-NC), Christopher Coons (D-DE), John Cornyn (R-TX), Orrin Hatch (R-UT), John Kennedy (R-LA) and John Boozman (R-AR).  The measure will now move to the House of Representatives for final passage.  House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) and Ranking Member Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) introduced companion legislation that passed July 23.
A brief description of the bill’s provisions follows.
Ending “Acts of War” Exemption Abuse
El Antiterrorism Act of 1992 exempted lawful “acts of war” from the scope of its civil liability provisions. However, some defendants accused of aiding and abetting acts of international terrorism have successfully claimed in court that the law’s “act of war” defense shields them from civil liability, even when the act of terrorism was perpetrated by a designated terrorist group. The Anti-Terrorism Clarification Act of 2018 clarifies that the “act of war” defense does not apply to acts carried out by entities designated as foreign terrorist organizations by the U.S. government or any person that has been determined by the court to not be a military force. This simple amendment will help ensure that American victims of terrorism—including soldiers and other personnel serving abroad—can have their rightful day in court.
Expanding Access to Remedies for Victims of Narco-Terrorism
Under current law, American victims of terrorism may use the assets of a perpetrating terrorist entity that are frozen by the U.S. government to satisfy court-awarded judgments. Assets frozen under the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act (“Kingpin Act”), however, currently remain unavailable to victims of terrorism. This leaves victims of narco-terrorism or other drug-related terrorist activity without a meaningful method of satisfying their Antiterrorism Act judgments. The Anti-Terrorism Clarification Act clarifies that assets blocked under the Kingpin Act are available to victims.
Clarifies U.S. Court Jurisdiction in Foreign Terrorism Cases
Recent flawed court decisions have called into question the Antiterrorism Act’s continued ability to hold terrorists or their supporters accountable in U.S. courts. For example, the Supreme Court’s recent decision to deny certiorari in Sokolow v. Palestine Liberation Organization—a case in which Chairman Grassley led a bipartisan amicus brief—leaves in place a flawed circuit court decision gutting the extraterritorial scope of the 1992 law. Carrying out or assisting an act of international terrorism that injures or kills Americans abroad should provide sufficient justification to subject defendants to U.S. legal sanctions. Moreover, no one benefiting from a U.S. program, such as foreign assistance, or maintaining a presence in the United States should be able to simultaneously dodge responsibility in U.S. courts for involvement in terrorist attacks that harm Americans. The Anti-Terrorism Clarification Act clarifies that certain defendants who take advantage of benefits under certain U.S. laws shall be deemed to have consented to jurisdiction in U.S. courts for any Antiterrorism Act lawsuit.